Journals / Glokom Katarakt / 2015 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 4

Surgical Outcomes of Ex-PRESS Mini Glaucoma Implant with Mytomicin C

Mitomisin C ile Ex-PRESS Mini Glokom İmplant Cerrahisi Sonuçlarımız

Pages
251–254
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, according to trabeculectomy it is an expensive method, and we believe that it should not be considered as the first choice

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To present our surgical results of Ex-PRESS mini glaucoma implant with Mytomicin C in glaucoma patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: In this retrospective study, 30 patients with Ex-PRESS mini glaucoma implant surgery with Mytomicin C were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, according to trabeculectomy it is an expensive method, and we believe that it should not be considered as the first choice
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose: To present our surgical results of Ex-PRESS mini glaucoma implant with Mytomicin C in glaucoma patients. Material and Method: In this retrospective study, 30 patients with Ex-PRESS mini glaucoma implant surgery with Mytomicin C were included. The demographic characteristics, preoperative and postoperative IOP, visual acuity, number of glaucoma medication, peroperative and postoperative complications were formed. The success was considered in the patients with IOP between 6-21 mmHg with/without antiglaucoma therapy after surgery; and the failure was considered in patients with IOP above 21 mmHg and/or the need for a second surgery.Results: Patients were male and 20 (66.6%), 10 (33.3%) were female with mean age of 62.9±10.7 . The mean follow-up time was 9.48±7.62 months (range, 6-24 months). The Ex-PRESS implant surgery were performed to 17 patients with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG), and 6 with pseudoexfoliative glaucoma, 3 with pigmentary glaucoma, 4 with neovascular glaucoma. The mean preoperative IOP was 26.6±10.0 mmHg with maximum medical therapy and 18.55±3.78 mmHg at the final control after surgery (p<0.001). Preoperative medication use was 3.24±1.0 and 0.28±1.6 at the final control after surgery (p<0.001). There was no peroperative complication, and postoperative hyphema (2), choroidal detachment/hypotension (2), wound dehiscence (2), corneal decompensation (1) and exposure of the implant (1) were observed. Implants were removed due to corneal decompensation in a patient, implant exposure in a patient and high IOP in two patients with neovascular glaucoma.Conclusion: Ex-PRESS mini glaucoma implant to provide IOP reduction in glaucoma patients, is a safe and effective surgery. However, according to trabeculectomy it is an expensive method, and we believe that it should not be considered as the first choice

Özet

Amaç: Glokom hastalarında Mitomisin C ile Ex-PRESS mini glokom implant cerrahisi sonuçlarımızı sunmak.Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu retrospektif çalışmaya Mitomisin C ile Ex-PRESS mini glokom implant cerrahisi yapılan 30 hasta dahil edildi. Hastaların demografik özellikleri, ameliyat öncesi ve sonrası göz içi basıncı (GİB) değerleri, görme keskinliği, kullanılan glokom ilaçları, ameliyat esnasında ve sonrasında oluşan komplikasyonlar kaydedildi. Cerrahi sonrası antiglokomatöz tedavi ilave edilerek veya edilmeden GİB'nı 6-21 mmHg'nın arasında tutulması başarı olarak; GİB'nın 21 mmHg'nin üstünde olması ve/veya ikinci bir cerrahiye ihtiyaç duyulması başarısızlık olarak kabul edildi. Bulgular: Yaş ortalaması 62.9±10.7 olan hastaların 20'si erkek (%66.6), 10'u (%33.3) kadındı. Ortalama takip süresi 9.48±7.62 ay (range, 6-24 ay) idi. Hastaların 17'sine primer açık açılı glokom (PAAG), 6'sına psödoeksfoliatif glokom, 3'üne pigmenter glokom, 4'üne neovasküler glokom nedeni ile Ex-PRESS implant cerrahisi yapıldı. Ameliyat öncesi ortalama GİB değeri maksimum medikal tedavi ile 26.6±10.0 mmHg idi. Ameliyat sonrası son kontrollerinde 18.55±3.78 mmHg (p<0.001) idi. Ameliyat öncesi ilaç kullanımı 3.24±1.0 iken sonrasındaki son kontrollerinde 0.28±1.6 idi (p<0.001). Peroperatif komplikasyon gelişmezken postoperatif hifema (2), koroid dekolmanı/hipotoni (2), yara yeri sızıntısı (2), korneal dekompanzasyon (1) ve implant ekspojuru (1) izlendi. Bir hastada korneal dekompanzasyon gelişmesi, bir hastada implant ekspojuru gelişmesi ve neovasküler glokomu olan iki hastada GİB'nın yüksek devam etmesi nedeni ile implant çıkarıldı. Sonuç: Ex-PRESS mini glokom implant cerrahisi glokom hastalarında GİB düşüklüğü sağlamakta etkili ve güvenilir bir cerrahidir. Ancak trabekülektomiye göre pahalı bir yöntem olduğu için ilk seçenek olarak düşünülmemesi gerektiği görüşündeyiz

🔖

Cite This Article

TÜRKOĞLU, E. B., YÜCEL, İ., ÜNAL, M., İLHAN, D., ÇETİNKAYA, A. (2015). Surgical Outcomes of Ex-PRESS Mini Glaucoma Implant with Mytomicin C. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 4, 251–254. https://ajindex.com/articles/226461

References (14)

  1. Sarkisian SR. The Ex-PRESS mini glaucoma shunt: Technique and Experience. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2009;16:134-7.
  2. Okka M, Bitirgen G, Kerimoğlu H ve ark. Ex-PRESS mini glokom imp- lant cerrahi sonuçlarımız. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2014.
  3. Maris PJ, Ishida K, Netland PA. Comparison of trabeculectomy with Ex-PRESS miniature glaucoma device implanted under scleral flap. J Glaucoma 2007;16:14-9.
  4. Good TJ, Kahook MY. Assessment of bleb morphologic features and postoperative outcomes after Ex-PRESS drainage device implantation versus trabeculectomy. Am J Ophthalmol 2011;151:507-13.
  5. Marzette L, Herdon LW. A comparison of the Ex-PRESS mini glauco- ma shunt with standard trabeculectomy in the surgical treatment of glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 2011;42:453-9. De Jong LA. The Ex-PRESS glaucoma shunt versus trabeculectomy in open angle glaucoma: A prospective randomized study. Adv Therapy 2009;26:336-45.
  6. Wagschal LD, Trope GE, Jianpriya D, et al. Prospective randomized study comparing Ex-PRESS to trabeculectomy: 1-Year results. J Gla- ucoma 2013.
  7. Wang W, Zhou M, Huang W, et al. Ex-PRESS implantation versus trabeculectomy in uncontrolled glaucoma: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8:63591. Dahan E, Carmichael TR. Implantation of a miniature glaucoma devi- ce under a scleral flap. J Glaucoma 2005;14:98-102.
  8. Chen G, Li W, Jiang F, et al. Ex-PRESS implantation versus trabecu- lectomy in open angle glaucoma: A meta-analysis of randomized cont- rolled clinical trials. PLoS One 2014;9:86045. Dahan E, Ben Simon BJ, Lafuma A. Comparison of trabeculectomy and Ex-PRESS implantation in fellow eyes of same patients: A pros- pective randomized study. Eye 2012;26:703-10.
  9. Mariotti C, Dahan E, Nicolai M, et al. Long term outcomes and risk factors for failure with the Ex-PRESS glaucoma drainage device. Eye 2014;28:1-8.
  10. Freedman J, Ferri S. Long-term comparison using Ex-PRESS glaucoma shunt in black and white patients. Can J Ophthalmol 2014;49:200-4.
  11. Moisseiev E, Zunz E, Tzur R, et al. Standard trabeculectomy and Ex- PRESS miniature glaucoma shunt: A comparative study and literature review. J Glaucoma 2014.
  12. Kanner EM, Netland PA, Sarkisian SR, et al. Ex-PRESS miniature glaucoma device implanted under a scleral flap alone or combined with phacoemulsification cataract surgery. J Glaucoma 2009;18:488-91.
  13. Stewart R, Diamond JG, Ashmore E, et al. Complications following Ex- PRESS glaucoma shunt implantation. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140:340-1.
  14. Salim S, Du H, Boonyaleephan S, Wan J. Surgic